Zach Wegner wrote:I think this is a good idea. It could be expanded to be a complete source of theory. For instance, in the null move page, we could quote the old post of Christophe Theron about the Null Move Observation. We could link his name to a page about him, his engine, and other ideas he might have talked about. If many people contribute to this, we could have a quite nice little site. And as it pertains to the original post, we could have a results section on each page, where different authors can describe their implementations and the outcome.
yes indeed. Some people have put together some of this information before, but the wiki lets anyone correct add and clarify it. So start editing away! Don Dailey just joined the wiki too.
I will try to add basic bages each day for a few weeks to fluff out the site outline. I encourage anyone who wants to join to start editing with me. Right now, I am requiring people sign up, just to prevent robots from trashing the wiki like so many other have done to others in the past.
I think this should be expanded beyond programming. For instance, I just created a page about the xboard protocol. We could have a page for xboard itself, as well as its spinoffs (winboard_x, winboard_f). Then we could have pages about other GUIs. We could then have pages for the testing groups. Why not have pages for famous contributors to computer chess? There is a lot of room for expansion.
Some other things I think might be important:
A nice logo
A coherent layout: Each page should have contents (if long enough), pictures, code examples, and on the side a topic listing. If you look at say http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calculus you can see the contents as well as a "Topics in Calculus" table on the right. This latter part could be used to separate the sections, like "Topics in Evaluation."
Code--should we use pseudocode, real C code, or what? This should be uniform throughout the pages.
Please consider a 'chess programming book' section, just for tried and true chess programming methods that work for almost all chess programs so that newbs (and me ) do not get lost in a mass of confusing, contradictory, counterproductive information. I personally can add many pages of ideas that only work for my program and will not work for others and I am sure that others can and will do the same. I think that a 'book' section could prevent a lot of harm from being done.
If you are on a sidewalk and the covid goes beep beep
Just step aside or you might have a bit of heat
Covid covid runs through the town all day
Can the people ever change their ways
Sherwin the covid's after you
Sherwin if it catches you you're through
A lot of talented people have joined. I made several people "Organizers" which can approve people. Now that there are several of them, approvals should happen a bit faster. It would be nice to get rid of the need to approve people who want to edit, but most wikis seems to get trashed as soon as that it done by advertising robots. Note that anyone can view the wiki...approval is only needed for people wishing to contribute. I just backed up the wiki, and will do that regularly.
So far, we have 22 pages with a lot of great information from a bunch of people. People are really gettign behind this and organizing a lot of information, but we can always use more people.
) do not get lost in a mass of confusing, contradictory, counterproductive information. I personally can add many pages of ideas that only work for my program and will not work for others and I am sure that others can and will do the same. I think that a 'book' section could prevent a lot of harm from being done.